Re: Aw: Re: adverbials

["David Trimboli" <SuStel@hotmail.com>]

From: <cheesbro@rpa.net>

> Quoting David Trimboli <SuStel@hotmail.com>:
>
> > From: "Stephan Schneider" <sts@stephan-schneider.net>
> > > >  > >qech nuq?  juplI' DaghomDI' ('ej tlhIngan Hol bolo'be'taHvIS)
> > nuq
> > > >Dajatlh?
> > > >>  >DaqlIjDaq qaS nuq?  nuq Data'?  qen lut QaQ Dabej'a'?
> > > >>
> > > >>  (what means /qech nuq/?)
> > > >
> > > >You asked /nuq'e' wIjatlh?/.  I responded with a rhetorical
> > question
> > > >repeating you:  "What ideas?  When you get together with your
> > friends..."
> > >
> > > hm. but are you sure about /qech nuq/? it seems very english to me
> > this
> > way.
> >
> >
> > I don't think /qech nuq/ works.  It means "What are ideas?"  A parallel
> > from
> > Okrand would be /Dochvam nuq/ "What is this?"  (Literally, "What is
> > this
> > thing?")  It doesn't mean "What things?"
> >
> > SuStel
> > Stardate 2654.5
> >
>
> It wasn't a full sentence.


I don't see how it would work even if it were incorporated into a full
sentence.  We've seen Okrand avoid */nuq Doch/ (or */Doch nuq/) by using
constructions of the form /Doch yIngu'/.  I think Stephan is right: */qech
nuq/ is trying to mimic English, but isn't using the words the way Klingon
uses them.

Instead of */qech nuq?/, the best utterance would have been /qech ngu'!/.
This is a clipped command (to keep it less than a complete sentence).  A
longer, complete version might be /qech DaqeltaHbogh tIngu'!/.

SuStel
Stardate 2654.9